tv [untitled] November 13, 2012 12:00am-12:30am PST
>> good afternoon, i'd like to call the october 23rd, meeting of the public utilities commission to order. madam secretary, would you call the roll? >> commissioner moran? >> here. >> commissioner torres? >> here. >> commissioner caen? >> here. >> commissioner vietor? >> here. >> commissioner courtney? >> here. >> commissioners, you have the minutes of the october 9 meeting. in front of you. are there any additions or corrections? >> i move the minutes. >> second.
>> moved and seconded. any comment? all those in favor? >> aye. >> the motion carries. madam secretary, i'd like to move item 6 next on the agenda. would you call that, please? >> item 6, other commission business, discussion and possible action in accordance with rule 6 of the rules of order to nominate and elect officers. >> and specifically that would be the offices of president and vice president of the commission. taking the president first, commissioner vietor. >> it would be my great pleasure to nominate commissioner torres as the next president of the san francisco public utilities commission. >> thank you. and is there a second? >> second. >> and seconded. is there comment? >> [speaker not understood]. [laughter] >> that's good. >> is there any public comment? seeing none, all of those in favor. >> aye. >> opposed?
the motion carries unanimously. >> congratulations. >> with that, you're president. and if i can give you the archly he -- gavel and take your seat. [laughter] >> one final, pass the resolution in your absence. thanking you for your service to the city and county of san francisco which spans more than your one-year service in fresno. >> thank you very much. (applause) >> >> and i'd like to echo appreciation for mr. moran. thank you so much for your leadership. >> thank you. it has been my honor and pleasure to be able to serve not only as a commissioner, but also as president for the last year. and i thank you very much for your assistance and the work of staff to support it as well. so, thank you. mr. president, carry on.
>> thank you very much. >> before you do, i, too, would like to echo my thanks to andy for his very hard work. there are a lot of things that happened this year, and also to note that andy, as you all know, was on management side at one point. and here he wears the hat as president of the commission, and he never micro managed, he never tried to wear two hats. and i admire him greatly for that. in the past we've had people that had been from management that do become president of the commission and they seem to want to be on both sides, so to speak. so, i admire that greatly in you. >> thank you. >> and the new president will take that under consideration as well. [laughter] >> the chair will now entertain a motion for vice president of the commission. >> i would like to make that motion. >> commissioner caen. >> thank you. i would like to nominate vince
courtney as vice president of the putctiontion commission. >> second. >> moved and seconded. are there any comments? all signify by saying aye. >> aye. >> abstentions? motion is carried. welcome, mr. vice president. >> thank you, mr. president. >> aye guess we'll move to the next item, which is item number 4. public comments. the traveler has returned. commissioners, in the year 2012 it's good to see a transition like this. so, you see a former assembly person bringing his experience and a union man bringing his experience at a time where a lot has to be done in this city. and i would like to thank the
president, the former chairperson for what has already been stated. i've known him for a very, very long time and i used to work at the presidio. so, we have a lot to do, especially with the sewer system improvement project. and we discussed a lot about the water system improvement project. and y'all have in this chambers listened to a lot of people from the city and county of san francisco, including a lot of members of the community, disadvantaged members who have come here and spoken to you all and asked your help. so, i think having a chair with a lot of his legislative experience, having a union
person who should fully understand what our city needs, and who should focus on helping our community, especially creating career jobs because we hear a lot, we hear a lot from the heads of departments. we hear a lot from the mayor. we hear a lot from the mayor's office of economic development and work force. but i would say the san francisco public utilities commission, because you are an enterprise department, you all have a little more clout to do things in a better way and to fulfill the aspirations of those who have come here again and again and again asking for help. so, i wish you all the best and i encourage the chair and the
vice-chair to do whatever it takes in this year and in the next year and the year following, because these three years will be very, very important to lay down the foundation. we already see with the big so-called prize, they did what they could with the water system improvement project. we need to do better with the sewer system improvement project. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. ms. jackson. good afternoon. i want to say thank you to the former chair for the work that you've done. i've been knowing for many, many years and worked with for many, many years, and you the chair and the vice-chair i've been knowing for -- i'm not going to say how long. >> thank you. [laughter] but i want to congratulate the both of you for the work that's coming before you and
the work that you have done in working with my community. i'm take talking about bayview hunters point community. and i'm looking for you to continue doing the good work that needs to be done that has not been done by the city and county of san francisco. and i will be coming back before you. and i know my three commissioners who were reappointed, i am so happy. and i'm going to ask the secretary when it comes to the next public comment to read what i have given to her so everybody can hear her plainly that you might not hear me. thank you very much. >> thank you, ms. jackson. terrence jones. commissioners, i'm terrence jones. i'm here, i just want to get some feedback. i'm the chair of the citizens advisory committee and i have some questions in my last
quarterly report that i wanted to let you know that we haven't just forgotten about. first of all, thank you, mr. moran, a president. it was nice of you to spend some time with me giving me some ideas about how to work with you. congratulations to the new president, the new vp. commissioner moran asked if we can move our chc meeting to the third tuesday of the month which we did last month to try to better accommodate giving feedback to the commission. so, last month we actually moved it, had to cancel it due to the debate, but november 20th we're having our next meeting. commissioner courtney and commissioner vietor asked if we give input on the community choice aggregation about how best to reach out to some of the non-english speaking community. and we've had -- we had a presentation in the power subcommittee. todd vestrom is going to talk
about that and talk about the powers the community have under item 13. we also in our next meeting are going to have further discussions with the puc et presenting as well as the department of the environment about possible ways that we can better reach out about the program. and that's it, thank you. >> thank you very much. any questions from members of the commission? thank you. mr. dick allen. >> i'm sorry, i actually do have a comment on that. i believe we are in receipt of one of the cca stakeholders who was interested in participating and felt there wasn't adequate notice that was going to be agendized on your agenda. so i would encourage you to make sure especially all of those gripes that worked on cca, when you do talk about that issue, that you make effort to invite them so that they can hear about what you come up with at your committee. absolutely, absolutely. >> thank you. i think we got the letter
as we were setting the agenda. but since we now have plenty of time frame, we should be able to invite anyone and everyone who might want to come. >> that sounds good, thank you. thanks. >> thank you, mr. jones. mr. allen. my name is dick allen. i've been a roller at lake merced for the past 20 years and i was co-chair of the lake merced task force. welcome, president torres. >> thank you. and also to commissioner moran, thank you so much as president for your continued interest in the issues of lake merced. we appreciate very much your comments. and to michael car lan, i've not seen you sitting in that seat before. you look very comfortable. [laughter] anyway, i think i'm making the comment at the right time and stop me if i'm wrong. i have seen that your staff has delayed the next lake merced
update to you for another two weeks. at the may 8 meeting earlier this year, you were very clear in saying that you wanted something very specific about the proposed m-o-u with rec and park department in six months. and since then that has been on the events calendar for a revisit on november 13. now, jerry calligan who could not be here today, but he is here in one sense in that he did make a recording of the may 8th meeting, commission meeting, and i'd like to quote one of the commissioners who stated, "not happy with the m-o-u, want to put a tight timeline on things, come back in six months with a real plan and budget numbers, need real progress in the next six months." the commissioner repeated several moments later, "a
six-month timeline is specific deliverables, so, why the delay"? the issue of who is really in charge of the lake that is owned by the san francisco puc needs to be resolved sooner rather than later. the fact that rec and park department has not come back with specific deliverables within the past six months disqualifies them from future participation in any management role at lake merced. rec and park department promises more than they can deliver. we ask you to reschedule the next lake merced update to november 13 and arrange for a serious commission workshop on the many, many lake merced issues. thank you very much. >> thank you, sir.
do you have something to read, madam secretary? >> yes, mr. president. ms. jackson asked me to read the letter that she distributed to the commission. dear mother jack on, i am pleased to inform you that you have been nominate and had selected to receive an honorary doctorate degree from humanities from the sacramento [speaker not understood]. on sunday, october 28, 2012 at the morning worship service at grace, 1121 oakdale street. the amenities are [speaker not understood] disciplines that studies human condition. the seminary has deemed you more than prestigious of this academic honor because of your long-term activism and political social work in the city and county of san francisco. your tenacious and unwaivering [speaker not understood] marginal eyes and had disenfranchised people, your historical initiative to improve the rights of women on welfare, your contributions in securing the southeast facility
that now housesedth southeast campus of san francisco city college, your contributions and support of your church and your pastor along with numerous other significant contributions in the field of humanities and social sciences. on october 28th, the letters of humd, doctorate of humanities will be entitled on you. you will henceforth be known as espinola jackson humd. on behalf of dr. mcbride who gives congratulationses for this most deserved honor. >> congratulations. (applause) >> congratulations, doctor elect. and we look forward to your ministrations now from a higher level in the future.
communications events calendar, [speaker not understood]. >> it's this, sir. >> i have one question. the letter summary includes a letter from the bay area water supply and conservation agency, and item e in communicationses was the regional water system report that was the subject of that letter. they made three specific requests of the commission and i was hoping that staff could give me an update as to what the disposition of those three requests was going to be. who is that staff person? >> i can actually do it. so, to answer your question, the report we do is a contractual requirement with our wholesale customers. the letter specifically that the very water supply [inaudible] requests that we actually do an addendum to our september 1st submittal based
on information we have specifically probably on calaveras dam. we'll have more detail at the november 13 meeting. the other letter is on budgets and schedules. we actually will address as well -- we see those as being voluntary items to be incorporated in the next annual report and we see no problem doing that either. we will have more detail on the first item november 13th and we'll talk to mr. jensen about incorporating the other two suggestions into the annual report that we submit to the state on september 1st. >> great, thank you very much. letter summary. >> the letter summary was provided in the binder. >> any questions? all right, move on to the quarterly water supply agreement update. >> mr. president, these are presentations included in your packet unless you want -- >> i want to make sure we go through them seriatum and move
on. any item a through e? we'll proceed accordingly. we've done number 6. now we come to the report of the general manager. >> i don't know if we are going to go back to the lake merced item, but i'd like to hear if it is going to be calendared or not. because i think the six-month -- as far as i can count, six months -- >> ends in november. >> and i know there was a public comment that rec and park should be disqualified from whatever it was. i think we did agree to a six-month time period which i think is coming up in november. and i guess i just want to hear, just through the chair, if that is going to be calendared. >> you were the commissioner reference in the remarks. >> i may have been. [laughter] >> go ahead. >> stephen gee, assistant manager for water. we did recommend that we continue that item for two weeks to november 27th [speaker
not understood], for two weeks partly because people involved in putting the information together particularly on the rec and park side are busy responding to questions about the park bond which is on the november ballot here in san francisco. and so it is just a matter of time management. there is nothing in any way, shape or form, despite the suggestion there was anything nefarious about the delay. that was far, far from the truth. >> great. i would hope that those extra two weeks would then help to provide a more robust plan and timeline for rec and park on lake merced. >> thank you, commissioner. thank you. the update. >> thank you, mr. president. congratulations. thank you, president past, mr. moran, and welcome, vince courtney to the ranks of officers. i'd like to talk about clean power sf. >> thank you. >> thank you, commissioners. barbara hail, assistants general manager for power. this is the first of our
regular week -- not weekly, every other week update on clean power sf. at our last meeting we described the board amendment to the clean power sf plan, primarily to incorporate customer notification and education, recovery of security costs and rates. and we had a conversation about how we would use any new survey results in informing our plan. what i have included in the packet for you today is a timeline and some background refresher materials on the two prior surveys we conducted. staff continues to incorporate the board's direction in our plan going forward on november 13th. we intend to come to you with proposals on how we will encourage and allow customers to express their interest in participating in the program. what's been referred to as
pre-enrollment. and how we will work that pre-enrollment concept with the statutorily required opt out and how we will use survey results in surveys to be conducted. and november 30th we'll have a joint puc lasko where we'll be able to discuss these more fully with the entities that have been so closely engaged on the cca program. with that i'm happy to take any questions, but i really think the information i have provided so far was just sort of to prime the pump in for the upcoming meeting. >> the fairbanks are pulling, why were they hoe ebb he en[speaker not understood]? >> they have been chose tone conduct the prior polls under our contract, contracting method. if we go forward with any other
polls, i'm sure or surveys, i'm sure we'll go through whatever the necessary steps are. >> we look for local pollsters that could be engaged as well? >> yes, absolutely. >> any other questions for members of the commission? >> mr. president, just a couple comments. i'm not going to be here for the next meeting so i just wanted to make a couple comments. first, i appreciate the more detail especially that you laid out. at our last meeting we talked about what the commission had anticipated there being really a final go, no go vote when this thing is fully baked and we have all the pieces in front of us. it looks as though that's going to be coming up in march of 2013. so, a lot of work to do between now and then, but i appreciate your laying that out as clearly as you have. as far as the outreach program, one of the things that we have
left unresolved when the commission acted almost a year ago, i guess, and sent this thing forward to the board of supervisors was the size of the program. and we said it would be somewhere between 20 and 30 megawatts to be determined later. and that's still in front of us. i assumed that you would want to nail that down before you go into the solicitation and outreach. the reason that i had sometime ago thought about scaling the program back to 20 megawatts was of the various risks that we have in the program. most of them are covered by various cash reserves that have been structured. one that we don't really have covered is a risk of under subscription. and if we come up short, then -- and it's less than 5% below the amount of power that we've
purchased where we do have a obligation to consume or pay for or dispose of that power, and there is a risk for us. the most recent polling that i saw, there was good news and bad news. the good news was that the people who really want to go with clean power, that number stays the same. that commitment is firm and it looks pretty good. the bad news was that some of the undecided people have gone to the no column where they would expect to opt out. and that means that your targeting has to be better because your fall back is somewhat constrained. the ability to go out and say, well, we'll backfill this with an additional subscription. the odds of that are a little bit less. so, that's one reason. the second reason is that the board of supervisors compromised the reserve amount by putting some other things in there that they wanted to fund.
and we are also looking toward doing brief qualification [speaker not understood]. all of that argues, in my view, for doing the initial offering at the lower level of 20 megawatts. and i don't know what staff has in mind at this point, but i just wanted to be clear to the staff and the rest of the commission that at least with the information that i have available at the moment, my inclination is stronger than it was before, that starting with something smaller we can make sure it's a success that it is in good order. thank you for the opportunity to make those comments. * in advance of the next meeting. >> again, i'm sorry you won't be here at the next meeting, but maybe this is something that we can try and unpack a little bit with lafco on november 30th as well. and hear from the staff the 20
versus 30 options some of the pros and cons and associated risk in moving with the higher number because i think at a cursory glance i think there is financial risk to the higher number, but there is also greater opportunity from an environmental perspective, benefit perspective. so it would be nice to kind of hear about that and weigh that out a little more carefully. i also saw in the timeline that the community notification and education plan and budget is supposed to come before us december 11. and i imagine that is the item we were sort of talking about last time. are we going to be talking about that with lafco and that is why it is appearing on the following -- because i imagine that lafco would have some feelings about that and want to have input on that as well and could help inform what that scope of work should be. so, i guess i would hope that the consultant that we have contracted with in the smaller amount would by lafco meeting at a minimum have something that we can at least a straw
man we can talk about at that time so we can make an informed decision that can be informed by some of the board members and lafco for the following meeting. >> yes, if i may. at the lafco meeting we'll be talking about how the pre-enrollment or expressions of interest in the program, how we envision that working and how we envision that working with the statutorily required audithv out. embedded in that conversation will be a conversation about how do we -- how are we actually engaging with customers or potential customers. * opt out how proactive are we being and with which customer groups, and how more responsive mode we're in with customer groups. because there will be an element, i think, given the size of the program that we're envisioning. there will be an element of us actively engaging with customers, but there will also
be customers who will call us up. in fact, we've already had some potential customers call us already expressing an interest in participating in the program. so, we need to be ready to address sort of both levels of customer interest and that will help us shape our pre-enrollment and our statutory opt out portions of our roll out of our plan. i wonder if i may also respond to something you said, commissioner moran, about the solicitation and outreach. and that you were imagining we would need to make a determination as to the size of the program before, if i heard you correctly, before solicitation and outreach. and i just wanted to say that from our perspective, part of the shaping of the program and the size of the program will be in response to some of the
outreach we perform. so, you know, as those prior surveys informed us, we expect that we will need to be talking with potential customers to understand if they're still as interested in the program as they were at the prices we expressed when we last talked to them. now that the board has told us to incorporate the security costs into the rates, now that we're incorporating 20% discount for low-income customers and recovery of those costs from other customers, the price is going to be higher. and, so, we're going to need to see if those customers are still interested. that will help us decide from a business perspective 20 megawatts, 30 megawatts. that will be one of the data points to help inform that decision. so, some of the outreach will need to occur before we answer that question thoughtfully for you, i think. and make a recommendation to you, i should say. >> well, no, thank you.